[thevillagechief]

Ah, the old "it's too dangerous to release" marketing move. Why even tell us about it?

[cuddlyogre]

For the extra dollars they'll obtain when it is no longer too dangerous to release.

[HeatrayEnjoyer]

Not everything is a conspiracy. It is very plausible they're speaking genuinely.

[fooqux]

And it's even more plausible this is just a marketing play to build hype. Take, for example, you just made some new super-pathogen in your basement lab. It could kill everyone on the planet. This is obviously pretty dangerous, so do you:

A) silently dispose of it and hope nobody else ever makes the mistake of creating it.

or

B) keep it in the freezer and hold a press release about how you made it but it's too dangerous to share any details.

[HeatrayEnjoyer]

No, it's not more plausible.

[illiac786]

I am utterly impressed by the logic of this argument.

[recursive]

That would require a for-profit corporate entity to be motivated by public safety. I can suspend my disbelief to some degree, but that's too far.

[Tao3300]

This isn't the first time someone has spoken like this. It won't be the last. It's 100% marketing.

[HeatrayEnjoyer]

Based on what proof?

[JTyQZSnP3cQGa8B]

I guess based on 2000 years of commerce and marketing experience from people without an ounce of empathy.

[exe34]

I have a bridge I'm selling....